Ionson counters SDi dispute

By Steve Pao

Second in a series on the<>

Oct. 21 Strategic Defense Initiative Forum.

Dr. James Ionson, director of science and technology for the Strategic
Defense Initiative (SDI) Office argued against the effectiveness of
measures that other nations might use to undermine SDI systems.

Ionson said that using solid rocket boosters could reduce a missile's
vulnerability by decreasing its time of exposure to defense systems. But
missiles with solid boosters would carry fewer warheads, he said.

Missiles with thicker shells are another potential SDI countermeasure.
But Ionson claimed that such missiles would be more expensive and massive
than normal missiles. Each missile, again, would carry fewer warheads.

An increase in the number of decoy boosters might also be detrimental to
a "Star Wars" defense system, he said. Decoys, however, could be easily
distinguished from real missiles, he argued.

Missiles that spin or that have shiny surfaces could reduce the
effectiveness of the lasers. Ionson countered that lasers could also
destroy missiles by "impact."

Ionson's final argument against SDI countermeasures lay in submarine
launches. In the case of submarine launch, the missile trajectory would
differ from the land-launched missiles, reducing SDI's effectiveness.
Submarines, however can carry only a limited number of warheads, he
explained.

"We're not here to recruit support for SDI, but the viability of the
concept is evenly split 50/50," he said.

"This underscores the need for further study," he continued. Peer
pressure that suppresses objective study could hurt the academic doctrine
and the search for truth, Ionson said. "Let the academic community continue
with objective study."

Fifty-four percent of the professors in 14 leading university physics
departments have signed a pledge to refuse SDI funding, according to Vera
Kistiakowsky, professor of physics. The pledge asserts that "most
scientists think SDI is dumb," she said.

Researchers desperate for funding may resort to SDI, Kistiakowsky said.
She also said that foreign scientists might be pressured to sign SDI
contracts.

Shaoul Ezekiel '68, professor of aeronautics and astronautics, as well as
electrical engineering and computer science, supported SDI funding. "If the
funding comes with no strings attached, there is no problem," he said.

When a professor accepts money, "it doesn't mean that the professor
endorses or that MIT endorses the basis for the funding," Ezekiel said.

Scott Saleska of the MIT Student Pugwash Group concluded that discussion
by saying, "We have fun with technology, but we must concern ourselves with
more than fun and intellectual challenge. We must think of the
consequences" such as "nuclear annihilation."